There is a distinction between arguing politics and arguing whether a politically charged story is well told. I do not see the value of relegating a small percentage of my complaints about The Dark Knight Rises to a different forum any more than I would for In Time, another heavy-handed movie from the opposite side of the political spectrum which, for the record, was even stupider.

Rest assured that if this movie substituted Batman's rogue's gallery for that of Captain Planet, teaming up Looten Plunder and Sly Sludge to dump millions of gallons of crude oil into Gotham Bay just for the sake of pollutin', I'd have found their antics no less cartoonish and every bit as abrasive.

I've absolutely no trouble with having an opinion. However, in my opinion, you try to shoehorn political messages into the story that only exist because of your own prejudices. Just as Citizen Kane was not a film about the joys of sledding, this is not a film about politics.

As for the some of the smaller complaints about Batman's ability to locate supervillains and other leaps of logic, I simply say "World's Greatest Detective".

« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 07:02:28 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I've never understood the "World's Greatest Detective" title for Batman anyway. When does he ever do detective work? He just uses gadgets and beats up people.

That's true of many of his film appearances, but the Batman Animated Series did a fine job of showing just why he had earned that moniker. Also, his comic book appearances (especially from the 70's) emphasized it. Unfortunately, most movie audiences today (and in recent history) won't accept a comic book hero that solves most of his problems with his mind so we're given action based batman usually.

« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 08:24:01 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I've never understood the "World's Greatest Detective" title for Batman anyway. When does he ever do detective work? He just uses gadgets and beats up people.

That's true of many of his film appearances, but the Batman Animated Series did a fine job of showing just why he had earned that moniker. Also, his comic book appearances (especially from during the 70's) emphasized it. Unfortunately, most movie audiences today (and in recent history) won't accept a comic book hero that solves most of his problems with his mind so we're given action based batman usually.

The upcoming Batman animated series is focusing mostly on his detective skills rather than his fighting abilities.

I've absolutely no trouble with having an opinion. However, in my opinion, you try to shoehorn political messages into the story that only exist because of your own prejudices. Just as Citizen Kane was not a film about the joys of sledding, this is not a film about politics.

No, there is political subtext present. There has been in all three films.

I've absolutely no trouble with having an opinion. However, in my opinion, you try to shoehorn political messages into the story that only exist because of your own prejudices. Just as Citizen Kane was not a film about the joys of sledding, this is not a film about politics.

No, there is political subtext present. There has been in all three films.

But the political aspects aren't the theme of the films, as AA seems to believe. Hence my Citizen Kane analogy. And there is no "one" political message throughout all three films, just as there isn't in TDKR. One person may see a conservative message, another may see a liberal one, and a third a libertarian message. If Nolan was trying to make a political statement, he must be one of the worst political satirists on earth.

« Last Edit: July 31, 2012, 08:23:13 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I'm taking my mom to see a Not Really IMAX, IMAX show at a mall tomorrow. I don't feel an Avengers/Captain America/Iron Man/TDK-ish urge to see it multiple times, but a college pal expressed an interesting in seeing it at some point so maybe I'll get in 3 viewings like I did with TDK.

Thumbs up from me. I think it's merely very good, and not great like the first 2. I think it's at least 30 minutes too long. BUT, it has a fantastic ending. It also is the first time I have ever liked Catwoman. In fact, I would call her a highlight (if not THE highlight) of the movie. I have no doubt that the movie would have been better had Heath Ledger not died, but Nolan made the best out of a bad situation. It definitely finishes as one of the best movie trilogies ever.

I can't believe Batman Begins only came out with that much,maybe people were not convinced yet after Batman and Robin

Do you reckon TDKR can beat TDK? or at least get over that 1 billion mark?,it is actually about $35million behind where TDK was at this point(at least in the U.S. box office)...but still nearly $600million Worldwide in just over two weeks is no bad thing

It also beat off competition this week with Total Recall,The Dark Knight Rises made $10.4 million while Total Recall made $9.2 Million this weekend

So, I'd keep that in mind when reading things into the respective films' box office performance. For its budget and # of screens, Batman Begins' global $372M take was very good and obviously convinced WB there was life in the franchise and Nolan was the one to stick with. It didn't need to be Avatar, just repair the damage Batman & Robin did to the franchise, and reboot it.

And I did find it the most "fun" of the 3 films when I attended the trilogy event opening night. I still see it as the most Batman-focused of Nolan's films, whereas TDK seems more focused on The Joker/Harvey Dent and TDKR at times is so focused on Bane and Gotham, Batman almost feels like a supporting character.====================

fwiw, my mom very much enjoyed TDKR yesterday at an AMC IMAX show ($15). The picture and sound were awesome, although I sometimes feel IMAX sound is Just Too Much. Hans Zimmers' score at times felt better suited to Gladiator (deafening; rattling stall doors in the nearby restrooms even).

I think I could just better enjoy the show, spend less time nitpicking plot points, and maybe it helped not being exhausted (as for the trilogy).

Sure, there's political subtext in TDKR, but I didn't think it was particularly conservative. As a liberal, it certainly didn't feel as though my beliefs were being criticized. I thought the anti-War on Terror subtext in TDK was much more pronounced.

Late to the party but overall enjoyed it. I noticed the length of the movie at times so that's not a good sign, and not sure about the very end. Can't decide if its a copout by Nolen or not. Felt a little to Hollywood to me.

Also not sure if it was the theater I saw it in but Bane's dialog was hard to understand at times. In fact there are several lines that I simply didn't understand what he said.

Not The Dark Knight but overall a good ending and a darn fine trilogy.

I went yesterday and gave myself a day to let it sink in. I agree with most here and can see where others are coming from (even AA, but see below). It's the weakest of the trilogy. It's too long and clunky in parts. There are plot holes and nonsensical moments, especially towards the end (it's like they knew it was way too long and so started rushing to the climax, making actions serve the plot instead of the other way around). However, there are truly great moments in it, too.

This won't be like Crystal Skull, where I'll do my best to keep my kid from seeing it and pretend it all ended with the last one. It won't even be like Return of the Jedi where I junker down to watch it, just because you have to finish the story. I imagine I'll watch the other two more often, but it has its place.

Now, spoiley bits.

Spoiler for Hiden:

I honestly cannot believe that I was hoodwinked by the whole Talia thing! I mean, when she was revealed my jaw actually dropped and my eyes went wide. I think I even muttered a "No way". I had read she might be Talia. Ra's has a daughter in the comics, so of course the possibility of a female child should have been in my mind. It's just the sensible way the pieces should have come together, but I was still surprised.

I've been trying to figure out why, too.

It might be the writing. The movie was clearly the story of Bane from the beginning. It seemed natural that the backstory we were getting was his. There was only one mention of Bane possibly having a boss that I remember, and it was dismissed, I think. By the way, if Bane is actually the helper, how the old is he??

It might be Bane's performance. His cadence and intelligence and calm menace all seemed reminiscent of Ra's. But really, it's just the League of Shadow's way. BTW, I completely understood every word Bane said, and loved the way he spoke. I just liked the musicality of it. I liked the character a lot, too.

It might be Marion Cotillard's performance (except for the lame, laid-back, 70s TV Special death scene). I completely bought the high society do-gooder act. And that's important, because if the audience sees through it, we think less of Wayne for being fooled. And when she revealed herself, it's like her eyes switched on. She was completely what I pictured Talia to be in the comics. Just amazing.

It might have just been the casting. That kid looked like a boy until it was supposed to be a girl. Was it the same kid?

It may have been forced on us, though. Why were the guys supposedly on Wayne's side feeding him the bullshit version of the story? Fear of Bane, I guess ("He wouldn't want us telling his tale"), but wouldn't the act of helping Bruce escape be even more punishable? I'll have to see it again some day to see how well they dance around this.

I remember being just as surprised and flabbergasted that I was taken in by the Ra's reveal in the first film, too. In hindsight, they both should have been obvious, but somehow weren't.

All in all, this was my favorite moment in the film, but there were other good ones, too. I really liked the way they handled "Robin" - his reveal wasn't a surprise, as it was fairly clear that the story was headed that way, but the name thing was a nice nod, and they handled it well. Much as I like Joseph Gordon Levitt, I hope someone doesn't get the idea to do a sequel with him. I think if he tries to pull off the deep voice, he'll sound even more ridiculous, if that's possible. BTW, every time I hear him doing the Bat voice, I think of the guy on College Humor that plays him. Example: Batman Chooses His Voice

For the political side of things, I think AA is on to something, though I think it's way less black and white than he's saying. There absolutely is a thread in the movies, but it's more about taking an issue that may or may not have some merit, and then asking: How far is too far? It's not as simple as saying that because it's the villain's stance, it must be villainized. There is an argument to be made for each one of the villain's points of view in each of the movies. But Nolan seems more interested in seeing how that point of view, how any point of view is corruptible if taken to extremes.

I actually figured out the whole Talia Al-Ghul thing pretty early in the movie. I may have read rumors about her being in the movie a long time ago, but I had forgotten all about it. However, when she went to bed with Wayne and he touched her scar, my mind immediately started racing. It went through a couple of stages: 1) They wouldn't have shown that scar if there wasn't something important about it. 2) They didn't explain it. 3) Since they didn't explain it, she must be hiding something for a grand reveal later. 4) She's not who she claims. 5) She's Talia!It took less than a second to go through all of those steps. Knowing that it was her didn't lessen the movie though.

What's etiquette for spoilers in a movie thread that's 14 pages long? Is anybody who still hasn't seen this carefully following this? Now I'd understand spoiler tagging this in an unrelated thread, but it seems to me we can move freely with our spoilers at some point.

David Cronenberg: But a superhero movie, by definition, you know, it's comic book. It's for kids. It's adolescent in its core. That has always been its appeal, and I think people who are saying, you know, "Dark Knight Rises" is, you know, supreme cinema art," I don't think they know what the f**k they're talking about.

Having determined that they're utterly pedestrian, is that something you would ever do, Robert?

DC: As an actor, I would play Batman.

Hmmm, he might be old enough for The Dark Knight Returns.

I wonder if Cronenberg saw something like Watchmen or Kick-Ass. Probably he'd still dismiss them but those might come closer to being something he'd appreciate.

I do think it'd be cool if someone threw something like, say, Daredevil at him and said "here, do something creative with this, with no studio interference." I just don't know if the masses are ready for a David Cronenberg comic book movie.

Cronenberg is being silly. I think a good writer and a good director can elevate almost anything to an artform if given the resources. He's been doing it with horror himself for a good long while (sometimes successfully, sometimes not). I'm not sure where he's getting the hubris to say others can't do the same thing in other genres.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

Cronenberg is being silly. I think a good writer and a good director can elevate almost anything to an artform if given the resources. He's been doing it with horror himself for a good long while (sometimes successfully, sometimes not). I'm not sure where he's getting the hubris to say others can't do the same thing in other genres.

That was my reaction, too. Unless he doesn't count his own work as art, he should shut the hell up about others.

and the film has surpassed The Dark Knight for overseas total,and the film has yet to open in China and ItalyBox Office Mojo

Quote

Early this weekend, The Dark Knight Rises flew past The Dark Knight's overseas total. The conclusion to Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy added $21.4 million from 61 markets, which brought its total to $488.6 million. That's ahead of The Dark Knight's $469.7 million, and Rises will drastically widen that gap with openings in China and Italy at the end of the month.

The movie's top-grossing territories so far are the U.K. ($77.8 million), South Korea ($40.8 million), Australia ($40.5 million), Germany ($29 million) and Mexico ($28.6 million). Worldwide, the movie's total has reached $898.4 million, and it should be on track for $1 billion eventually.

Just wanted to come in and chime that I thought the movie was awesome and to add the following thoughts

Spoiler for Hiden:

Bane was totally friend-zoned by Miranda/Talia. He was doing all that stuff for her because he was in love with her. And at the end when she leaves him the last time all she says was 'Goodbye my friend'. Dig that dagger deeper Talia

and

The general population probably thought that Bruce Wayne was exiled/killed when Bane was running the show

Don't think I'm not aware of the irony of posting a news story based off a Nuke The Fridge link, but there it is: according to sources in contact with the website, Christopher Nolan may well be planning a Director's Cut for the Blu-Ray release. Who their sources are I have no idea, but it actually wouldn't be unprecedented - costume designer Lindy Hemming told GQ recently that there was a whole sequence on Bane's origin that was filmed but not used in the movie. In addition, Nuke The Fridge states that there are new scenes with Ra's Al Ghul (Liam Neeson) that were filmed as well. They state that the total scenes would add another thirty minutes to an already pretty long movie.

Nolan isn't known for Director's Cuts. From what I understand he has final edit on his movies, and there's rarely even deleted scenes on the video releases. But for THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, it could be possible - some of the scenes in the third act seem awfully truncated, even through the bloat, and Nolan might have edited his movie in a way to keep it under three hours. I still consider this unlikely - Nolan is fairly meticulous when it comes to his movies, and I doubt he'd throw that out for THE DARK KNIGHT RISES.

But, the fact is that there are scenes that didn't make the theatrical edit. Whether or not Nolan thinks that they would add to a Director's Cut obviously remains to be seen, but they are out there. Pacing is essential to Nolan and how his movies work, and it's possible that either he didn't want to muck up the theatrical release with these scenes, or that they just didn't work in the scheme of things. Obviously this is all rumor and conjecture, so we'll see.

Doesn't sound solid,but it's interesting to know that the scenes are out there